(08-08-2017, 09:13 PM)tobiasxz Wrote: Heres mine(even though I already showed you lmao), so everyone can see it can make a major difference.

Above is After/Below is before:

but the real question is, why are you not limiting frames....
so much extra stress on your pc. for little to no visual improvement. after a point, you can't see the difference between 175 frames and 200 frames.

like yes, it gives you more frames. and this is great if you are on a potato pc. but at 161 and 233 frames I don't see the point lol. id like to see the numbers from a pc that was previously running at like 30-60 frames

(08-08-2017, 09:13 PM)tobiasxz Wrote: Heres mine(even though I already showed you lmao), so everyone can see it can make a major difference.

Above is After/Below is before:

but the real question is, why are you not limiting frames....
so much extra stress on your pc. for little to no visual improvement. after a point, you can't see the difference between 175 frames and 200 frames.

like yes, it gives you more frames. and this is great if you are on a potato pc. but at 161 and 233 frames I don't see the point lol. id like to see the numbers from a pc that was previously running at like 30-60 frames

Fps drops, because of frame pacing dropping from 90-60 feels like it goes below 60 do to bad frame pacing. While dropping from 230-175 is basically unnoticeable. "Frame pacing" may not be the correct word for it, but basically fps drops can cause micro-stuttering if it ends up near or below your monitor refresh rate and back up to being really high.

Also vsync sucks unless it's fast vsync and even that has a bit too much input delay for many people for fps shooters. Which this is at the end of the day.